- About this Journal ·
- Abstracting and Indexing ·
- Advance Access ·
- Aims and Scope ·
- Annual Issues ·
- Article Processing Charges ·
- Articles in Press ·
- Author Guidelines ·
- Bibliographic Information ·
- Citations to this Journal ·
- Contact Information ·
- Editorial Board ·
- Editorial Workflow ·
- Free eTOC Alerts ·
- Publication Ethics ·
- Reviewers Acknowledgment ·
- Submit a Manuscript ·
- Subscription Information ·
- Table of Contents
Abstract and Applied Analysis
Volume 2014 (2014), Article ID 634710, 4 pages
Applications of Differential Subordination for Argument Estimates of Multivalent Analytic Functions
Department of Mathematics, Yangzhou University, Yangzhou 225002, China
Received 21 November 2013; Accepted 20 January 2014; Published 26 February 2014
Academic Editor: David Kalaj
Copyright © 2014 Meng-Ting Lu et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
By using the method of differential subordinations, we derive some properties of multivalent analytic functions. All results presented here are sharp.
This paper is dedicated to Professor Miodrag Mateljević on the occasion of his 65th birthday
Let denote the class of functions of the form which are analytic in the open unit disk . Let and be analytic in . Then, we say that is subordinate to in , written as , if there exists an analytic function in , such that and . If is univalent in , then the subordination is equivalent to and . Let be analytic in . Then, for , it is clear that if and only if
Recently, a number of results for argument properties of analytic functions have been obtained by several authors (see, e.g., [1–5]). The objective of the present paper is to derive some further interesting properties of multivalent analytic functions. The basic tool used here is the method of differential subordinations.
To derive our results, we need the following lemmas.
Lemma 1 (see [6, Theorem 1, page 776]). Let be analytic and starlike univalent in with . If is analytic in and , then
2. Main Results
Our first result is contained in the following.
Theorem 4. Let and . If satisfies and where is the smallest positive root of the equation then The bound is sharp for each .
We can see easily that (13) has two positive roots. Since and , we have
Then, from the assumption of the theorem, we can see that is analytic in with and for all . Taking the logarithmic differentiations in both sides of (17), we get
for all . Thus, inequality (12) is equivalent to
By using Lemma 1, (20) leads to
According to (16), (22) can be written as
Now, by taking and in (2) and (3), we have
for all because of . This proves (14).
Next, we consider the function defined by for all . It is easy to see that for all . Since it follows from (3) that Hence, we conclude that the bound is the best possible for each .
Next, we derive the following.
Theorem 5. If satisfies and where then The bound in (31) is sharp.
Then, from the assumption of the theorem we can see that is analytic in with and for all . According to (32) and (29), we have immediately
Now, by using Lemma 1, we obtain
Since the function is convex univalent in and
from (35), we get inequality (31).
To show that the bound in (31) cannot be increased, we consider It is easy to verify that the function satisfies inequality (29). On the other hand, we have as . Now, the proof of the theorem is complete.
Finally, we discuss the following theorem.
Theorem 6. Let . If satisfies and for all , where then The bound in (39) is sharp.
Proof. Define the function by (17). For , it follows from (17) and (18) that
for all . Putting
in Lemma 2 and using (42), we see that if
then (41) holds true.
Letting and , we deduce that Making use of (46), we obtain that Therefore, if satisfies (39), then the subordination (44) holds, and, thus, we obtain (41).
For the function we find that where is defined by (45). In view of (46) and (49), we conclude that the bound in (39) is the largest number such that (41) holds true. This completes the proof.
Conflict of Interests
The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.
The authors would like to express their sincere thanks to the referees for careful reading and suggestions which helped them improve the paper.
- A. Gangadharan, V. Ravichandran, and T. N. Shanmugam, “Radii of convexity and strong starlikeness for some classes of analytic functions,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 211, no. 1, pp. 301–313, 1997.
- J.-L. Liu, “The Noor integral and strongly starlike functions,” Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 261, no. 2, pp. 441–447, 2001.
- M. Nunokawa, S. Owa, E. Y. Duman, and M. Aydoǧan, “Some properties of analytic functions relating to the Miller and Mocanu result,” Computers & Mathematics with Applications, vol. 61, no. 5, pp. 1291–1295, 2011.
- N.-E. Xu, D.-G. Yang, and S. Owa, “On strongly starlike multivalent functions of order β and type α,” Mathematische Nachrichten, vol. 283, no. 8, pp. 1207–1218, 2010.
- D.-G. Yang and J.-L. Liu, “Argument inequalities for certain analytic functions,” Mathematical and Computer Modelling, vol. 52, no. 9-10, pp. 1812–1821, 2010.
- T. J. Suffridge, “Some remarks on convex maps of the unit disk,” Duke Mathematical Journal, vol. 37, no. 4, pp. 775–777, 1970.